Recent content by olgerm

All tensors here are contravariant. from maxwell equation in terms of E-field we know that: $$\rho=\frac{\partial E_1}{\partial x_1}+\frac{\partial E_2}{\partial x_2}+\frac{\partial E_3}{\partial x_3}$$ from maxwell equation in terms of magnetic 4-potential in lorenz gauge we know that...

Since this is a correct implementation of F3, all other correct implementations of F3 must be logically equivalent to this one. All correct implementations of F3 must be also logically equivalent to implementations of F3 that use functions that can be "simplified out" from there. All correct...

Pay attention to that: in call of F3 H1 is never called so that both arguments of H1 are equal.

By not halting i mean that an algorithm would stay in an infinit loop. if an algoritm is implemented as a computerprogram and exectuted then the execution-process would never end itself. If a non-halting algrothm is implemented as python-subprogram(these are also called functions sometimes, but...

F3 is indeed equalent to the code you posted. the sourcecode to define F3 using H1 is correct. You could implement F3 this way using H1. Maybe it is my problem, but I do not see how does not prove that if H1 does not exist then F3 also does not exist. could you explain it going even to details...

function is something that maps any arguemnt to some value. not returning anything is not an option. as i said in my first post in this thread: We call G aa function that ccepts 1 argument and returns negation of what call of its argument with itself as its argument would return. aka ##G(x)=\neg...

it does not exist. If you think it does exist try to answer following questions: What you think G(G) should return? Is that what you think G(G) should return in accordance with definition of G? A diffenernt funciont (lets call it G2) that that has following properties: accepts 1 argument(lets...

## (A \implies B) \land (B \implies \neg A) ## is itself is not contradictory. it is same as just ##\neg A## . Possible values for A and B for this case: A=False and B=False A =False and B =True and it is untrue because ##B = \left ( D(D2) \text{ returns} \right ) ## not that ##B = \left (...

What is the issue? I do not see how this proves that F3 can not exist. *F3(D,D2)==True *form definition of F3 we know that if F3(D,D2)==True then D(D2) returns (in other words halts) *from definition of D we know that if D(D2) to ever returns then F3(D2,D2)==False *from definition of f3 we know...

I do not see how D2 would prove, that F3 does not exist. In call D2(D2) first argument of D2 is not a function, that returns True on every input.

The most known proof of undecidability of the halting problem is about like that: #assume we have an hypothetical function that can determine whether any program P would halt on input i. def H1(P, i): """ H1 is a hypothetical function that determines whether program P halts on input i...

I took "David J. Griffith, Introduction to Quantum Mechanics". Also tried to read "J. J. Sakurai and S. Tuan, Modern Quantum Mechanics", but "David J. Griffith, Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" seems more easily understandable.

I try to, but could you just directly answer my question? Getting direct and clear answers to such basic questions makes learning much faster. Which book do you recommend?

It is easier to understand it as functions(operators that take wavefunction as argument) and return new functions, which module square is probabity-density of the observable value. Is there a function(like fourier transform is to get momentum-wavefunction form position-wavefunction) that can...

I do not really know. That is why I asked it. I guessed if someone measured electron this given region, then it he would have that expectation value. So if some one measured the energy of the electron in area x<0 he would have the same expectation value as he measured these in region 0<x?